what's the point of G and T?

[thewomanwhothoughtshewasahat]

asking out of genuine interest - in no way meant to be aggressive, in case anyone jumps on me. Is the idea to ensure that a child does not become unhappy or bored, in which case it makes sense; or is to get them doing extra stuff, more exams, earlier exams, even if they were happy as they were, in which case I have my doubts. I strongly suspect my dh was G&T - he says he learnt nothing in primary school, but was very happy sitting in the corner drawing. He has in no way been held back by being allowed to do this - I don't really see how a g and t scheme would have helped him. Is it best to leave a happy g and t kid to just get on with it?

Some of it is about them having a special need and every child is entitled to an education that suits them. SEN is not just for lower ability kids but to any child who should have extra help.

I'd say the answer to your question is probably yes: if the child's happy, leave him/her be. Sounds like it worked out fine for your dh! It's just that there are lots of children who are bored or bullied, and can develop serious problems because of either of those.

Thta;s how I think fauve (hi btw hatstand as was, we met at Christmas). Obviously if children are bored, unhappy, bullied, then they do need something to address that. But if the whole thing is about achieving potential, being the best you can, I feel faintly uncomfortable - I can't help but wonder if it feeds a narrow view of what achievement is all about.

I do agree. But then I know nowt about it either. what do they do on g&t schemes?

actually whatever they do - I am faintly uncomfortable about the name. if it's about stopping bullying then call it a stop bullies scheme and let those less clever victims in as well.

i agree with twwtswah that is.

can i just call you hat?

As someone who previously worked in education as the "able pupil coordinator" for the maths department, I found that in my experience it was often the parents of bright children that wanted an exclusive programme.

This meant writing schemes of work to suit the level that they are working at which worked out fine while I was there. However, like many of you, I have my doubts about the definition of GT. During my short career in education, I have only met one child who would have definitely benefited from accelerated learning. The school's GT coordinator thought it was a good idea to ask the GT pupils on her list to sit the GCSE maths paper "for fun" at year 7/8. All of them bar one would have failed if it was the real thing. This lad got an A without a problem. I thought that this was a crap idea anyway but most of the pupils on the list are what I would consider as very clever rather than "gifted".

So to answer twwtswah question, yes there is a point in GT programme but it is somewhat hazy as to what genuine GT is.

I think the current trend in G+T is mostly to offer more breadth of learning rather than accelerated learning. I think a child has a basic right not to be bored rigid all day every day at school and not all of them will sit happily doodling if left in this position. But I am also uncomfortable with labelling and partitioning kids (but then as we do it anyway in many parts of the country with the grammar system is it so bad? At least with G+T any child can move into the group at any time). As far as I can tell they label a large number of kids so as to be sure they include the very few who really need it but in doing this they don't really help the truely gifted kids who are way beyond all their peers. Pulling out the top 10% benefits the bright sparks not the really gifted so much.

I'm sure I read somewhere that a lot of criminals are really very bright, but got disillusioned at school and turned their energies elsewhere. If that's true it's a good argument for not just letting them get on with it.

i am gofted at gettin pissed.
i am talented at gettin pissed

I'm of yuo custardo. I've got an exam next week and have spent all weekend working.

IN our local area twwtswh any extra money for G and T programmes goes to the poorest area- - our city is the third most deprived in the UK, so it does poor areas rather well. The brightest kids are got together from several schools are given extra activities in an attempt to encourage them to get 5 GCSE's and perhaps go onto A levels, univeristy if they want. To show them there's opportunities etc. I do think there's a point and the money is also spread wider, so enrichment activities are laid on for all pupils across the ability range (including at ds1's school- an SLD/PMLD school - severe learning difficulties/profound and multiple learning difficulties).

I think that is a sensible use of money.

Incidentllay the LEA has a legal responsibility to provide a "suitable" education, not the best- so for a gifted and talented child they do not have to stretch them - just give them a chance to learn to read and write and take exams. For a child with SN they just have to provide access to a suitable school where they will be able to learn. Nothing more.

My daughter is 14 and classified as G&T across many subject areas. I am also a parent governor and as such have had the opportunity to attend a special day event at a local school that invited G&T students to mix together and take part in joint activities ~ which my daughter also attended.

As someone who almost certainly would have been considered G&T had the label existed back then, I can only say that I am very happy that this initiative exists today.

I am not too happy with the actual "Gifted and Talented" title ~ as a teacher said to me recently, "I've been teaching for twenty years and in that time I have known only one student that I would consider gifted" ~ I think the identification of very able students can only be for the good. After all, so much assistance is given to children who are statemented, but we are inclined to forget that our brightest children have 'Special Needs' too.

As I see it, the aim of G&T is not to accelerate students' learning, but more to enrich and extend the existing curriculum and encourage lateral thinking, and G&T days are designed to allow bright kids to mingle together and help with that all too familiar "Tall Poppy" syndrome that can mark out bright kids and make them a target for teasing.

I was apalled recently to see a letter from a teacher in a teaching magazine declaim G&T as something that gave more to students that have advantages anyway! Not so, brains ~ like death ~ are a great leveller and the great Brain Fairy doesn't choose only to visit those households above a certain income, and while it is fine for wealthy parents to ensure their child gets the best education in a fee~paying school, it is high time the State sector did something for the bright children whose parents aren't so financially endowed.

Sometimes I think we are inclined to cringe away from celebrating excellence in all its many forms, and as equally disinclined to encourage it.

In any case, those who would not want to see their child partake in such 'elitism' has a choice: as far as I know G&T activities are provided, but are not compulsory. ;)